2021 Climate Change

[Nigel]

The Texas Nuclear power stations froze up and failed

ERCOT acknowledges that frozen wind turbines have played a role, but that frozen instruments at natural gas, coal and nuclear facilities and a limited supply of natural gas are the main factors.
“We’ve had some issues with pretty much every kind of generating capacity in the course of this multi-day event,” said ERCOT’s Dan Woodfin.
Wind shutdowns during the current crisis accounted for 3.6 to 4.5 gigawatts of energy, or less than 13 per cent of the 30 to 35 gigawatts of total outage, Mr Woodfin told Bloomberg.

Are frozen wind turbines to blame for Texas power outages?

More than 4.2 million people left without power following winter storm Uri

www.independent.co.uk

 

[joe384]

The Texas Nuclear power stations froze up and failed

Are frozen wind turbines to blame for Texas power outages?

More than 4.2 million people left without power following winter storm Uri

www.independent.co.uk

It's a bit hard to get actual facts I am finding, I think one shutdown due to a safety procedure, others were operating at reduced capacity.

At least Ted Cruz "seems" to admit there is a problem that needs looking at:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361833252567179266

 

[SawMaster]

It is a multi-faceted problem, and it happens when you design for only expected needs and conditions. Smart people see beyond this and know that while infrequent, the unexpected DOES happen and you'd better be ready to handle it. We see the same stupidity in California in the summertime when everyone wants their air conditioning and fire dangers are high, but that's a yearly event for them. People also need to be ready to take care of themselves for a few days at least without any form of outside assistance; once again a little foresight and remembering of the past can have huge benefits.

We may get a minor ice storm here tonight, so just to hedge my bets I'm going to get my generator and old kerosun heater out of storage although we can do fine without them simply because it can make life a little nicer if we lose power and it can add a few days survivability for us if things go awry. Plus the neighbors may not be as ready for the possibilities as we are. I've been wanting to get that stuff here anyway and it's a good time to do that

And as always I have to wonder what's going on in the heads of those people whose games and phones cease working for a lack of power- betcha they're going to be totally lost and going mad having never lived without those distractions before I still don't want them to freeze to death though; nobody should suffer that way

Phil

 

[kamkar]

Greenpeace.dk are a funny bunch, they will not move on anything before we move on everything, cuz as they say everything is related.
And while this is also true, if you dont move on being able to breathe the other stuff dont matter much, plus i am willing to bet if you move on climate alone it will still have a positive effect on the other things too.

 

[Nigel]

Greenpeace.dk are a funny bunch,

Largely their fault that we are currently still burning a lot of fossil fuels instead of using a lot more nuclear, most countries with nuclear power plants have been cutting back on nuclear instead of expanding, largely because of Greenpeace! They may have prevented the development of nuclear technology to the extent that Greenpeace are the main cause of the global warming crisis! France ignored them, France has very low CO² electricity, and very low CO² trains.

 

[kamkar]

I am wondering if Greenpeace will oppose fusion plants as much as fission plants.
Also funny how the narrative have changed from waste and handling it, to price and time it take to build a plant.

 

[Nigel]

I am wondering if Greenpeace will oppose fusion plants as much as fission plants.
Also funny how the narrative have changed from waste and handling it, to price and time it take to build a plant.

Hard to say, they have never campaigned for safe modern nuclear fission, only a complete ban on nuclear.

I think they understand that for most people, nuclear waste is not really an important issue, whereas the cost of building new nuclear plants is, and the time required means that they are no longer a way to achieve net zero by 2050 anyway, we simply could not build enough. Same goes for the fusion unless there is a major breakthrough on construction costs, both in money and time.

It's a bit hard to get actual facts I am finding, I think one shutdown due to a safety procedure, others were operating at reduced capacity.

Seems that most of the problem is due to frozen water, and water is used for gas and nuclear power production, also for gas extraction which is why there is a shortage of gas and exports are now banned!

Texas rattles gas markets by limiting out-of-state sales during blackouts

Texas Governor Greg Abbott told a media briefing on Feb. 17 that he was banning gas from leaving the state through Feb. 21 to ensure in-state power generators had ample supplies. Abbott said he was forced to act as millions of Texans remain without power for a third day amid frigid temperatures...

www.worldoil.com

Hospitals in Austin are running out of water, forcing some to transfer patients

St. David’s South Austin Medical Center said a series of problems began after it lost water pressure from the city Wednesday. Seton hospitals in the area are also facing water problems.

www.texastribune.org

Texas Leaders Failed To Heed Warnings That Left The State’s Power Grid Vulnerable To Winter Extremes, Experts Say | Houston Public Media

Texas officials knew winter storms could leave the state’s power grid vulnerable, but they left the choice to prepare for harsh weather up to the power companies — many of which opted against the costly upgrades. That, plus a deregulated energy market largely isolated from the rest of the...

www.houstonpublicmedia.org

 

[Dashmellow]

Hard to say, they have never campaigned for safe modern nuclear fission, only a complete ban on nuclear.

Well, at least Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore came around to supporting nuclear.

Why a Greenpeace co-founder went nuclear​

Co-Founder of Greenpeace Envisions a Nuclear Future​

Wired News speaks with Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, who now co-chairs a pro-nuclear power coalition.

I think they understand that for most people, nuclear waste is not really an important issue, whereas the cost of building new nuclear plants is, and the time required means that they are no longer a way to achieve net zero by 2050 anyway, we simply could not build enough.

Many people fear nuclear because of the potential for serious accidents and radiation disasters such as seen in Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi. To this day Fukushima is still dumping radioactive water into the ocean.

There is a way forward for nuclear however and that is with new modern designs that are far safer, less expensive and quicker to build.

One solution is Advanced Small Modular Reactors( SMRs) These are safe passive designs that are manufactured off site and installed in a suitable location. Modular reactors allow capacity to be added to a facility at a later date. They are cost effective and can be deployed far more rapidly compared to tradition nuclear plants. If new advanced reactor designs can be deployed fast enough it could make a significant difference in achieving net zero before 2050.

Small modular reactors (Wikipedia)​

The first modular nuclear reactor pilot project was recently approved by the US DOA using NuScale Power modules

NuScale Power

 

[Nigel]

There is a way forward for nuclear however and that is with new modern designs that are far safer, less expensive and quicker to build.

Yes, it is a way forward, but I'm not convinced it can be built fast enough, and although they may be less expensive, they have to compete with wind, which gets cheaper every year:

As of 2020 costs for offshore wind power stations is the lowest cost of any other UK electricity generation, less than 50% of the cost of Nuclear Power (before balancing/storage costs).

 

[kamkar]

They are pretty nifty those little new reactors, and foolproof to a level i wouldn't even mind a Dane operating one.
+ they can run just fine on waste of older type generators, meaning i assume you can get fuel for free.
And i think we Danes need something for sure, otherwise we might end up in the same situation Texas are in right now,,,,,,, which on the whole are a bit embarrassing if you ask me.

Dont get me wrong i know we can get power from other countries and sell power to other countries, and thats just Dandy, but i dont think we Danes should rely one bit on being able to do that

 

[Dashmellow]

Yes, it is a way forward, but I'm not convinced it can be built fast enough, and although they may be less expensive, they have to compete with wind, which gets cheaper every year:

You're "not convinced"?

I guess you should contact the US Department of Energy, NuScale Corporation, The Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN), The Office of Advanced Reactor Technologies (ART), the Western Initiative for Nuclear, The Nuclear Energy Institute and the many other organizations and corporations worldwide working on implementing carbon free energy solutions and tell them that Nigel from DCT who spends all of his waking hours at his keyboard in Devon UK posting to a dash cam forum "is not convinced" that their efforts or expenditures of billions of dollars is worth their time or expense or trouble so they should simply pack up and go home.

Your arrogance and condescending attitude never ceases to surprise me. I mean, other than always acting like you are more knowledgeable on every single subject than literally anyone else on the planet, what credentials do you possess that you feel confident making such pontifical pronouncements like this all the time?

Perhaps, as you imply, the world doesn't really need any base load energy capacity after all?

The fact is that most actual experts working on this problem agree that nuclear, along with wind, solar and other renewables will need to work together in concert to solve the world's energy/carbon/climate crisis. They don't particularly care if some guy on the internet is "convinced" of their efforts or not. Nor do I.

 

[Dashmellow]

They are pretty nifty those little new reactors, and foolproof to a lever i wouldn't even mind a Dane operating one.
+ they can run just fine on waste of older type generators, meaning i assume you can get fuel for free.
And i think we Danes need something for sure, otherwise we might end up in the same situation Texas are in right now,,,,,,, which on the whole are a bit embarrassing if you ask me.

 

[Nigel]

wind, solar and other renewables will need to work together in concert to solve the world's energy/climate crisis.

Unfortunately, nuclear does not work in concert with wind and solar! Wind and solar work together quite well.

Nuclear does not work well as a base load, just look at France, might make sense for hydrogen production though.

 

[Dashmellow]

Unfortunately, nuclear does not work in concert with wind and solar! Wind and solar work together quite well.

Nuclear does not work well as a base load, just look at France, might make sense for hydrogen production though.

Nuclear is basically the poster child of base load as a prime example of unvarying power production. Unvarying power plants can be coal, nuclear, biomass, hydroelectric, combined cycle plants, geothermal, ocean wave and ocean geothermal. Base load energy sources form the backbone of electricity production to variable energy sources such as wind and solar, thus the two "work in concert". There are some energy storage options for renewables but nothing on the required scale.

Climate change and carbon cycles aside, the world's energy needs are anticipated to double by 2050, a fact that many solar and wind advocates fail to recognize. As things stand now, there is no other alternative to a sustainable energy future than nuclear as one of the primary power components going forward and the only way to do that is to create a modern, efficient, safe fleet of reactors.

 

[kamkar]

Yes it is very interesting looking forward.
We in the industrialized world cant well ask for the emerging countries that " no you can not have what we have" with the climate as excuse. So India ASO they are going where we have gone and China have gone, and chance are they will probably move even faster than we did.
So with no interventions things will just escalate faster and faster, and at the tip of this blade will be energy consumption.

Not many are talking about China put a new coal plant online every 2 weeks or so, that thats just for their power requirements, and there are still large parts of China, and a good amount of Chinese that get by with a pretty small power footprint.

 

[Nigel]

Not many are talking about China put a new coal plant online every 2 weeks or so, that thats just for their power requirements, and there are still large parts of China, and a good amount of Chinese that get by with a pretty small power footprint.

Things are changing:

• China added just under 72GW of wind power capacity in 2020, nearly tripling the amount of capacity added in 2019, according to data from the National Energy Administration (NEA).
• Installed capacity of solar power rose by 48.2GW, returning that sector to growth after a loss of momentum during the previous two years.
• Hydropower was up by 13.23GW.
• Chinaʼs coal fleet grew by 29.8GW in 2020.

 

[Dashmellow]

Things are changing:

• China added just under 72GW of wind power capacity in 2020, nearly tripling the amount of capacity added in 2019, according to data from the National Energy Administration (NEA).
• Installed capacity of solar power rose by 48.2GW, returning that sector to growth after a loss of momentum during the previous two years.
• Hydropower was up by 13.23GW.
• Chinaʼs coal fleet grew by 29.8GW in 2020.

Amusing that you fail to mention China's nuclear fleet.

China’s nuclear association announced that the country will build six to eight nuclear reactors a year between 2020 and 2025 thus raising their total capacity to 70 gigawatts, up 43.5% from May, 2020 when the announcement was made. China’s total installed nuclear capacity was expected to stand at 52 GW by the end of 2020, rising to around 200 GW by 2035.

 

[Nigel]

At least Ted Cruz "seems" to admit there is a problem that needs looking at:

A focus of particular wrath on Thursday was Senator Ted Cruz, who was spotted leaving frigid Houston Wednesday on a flight bound for Cancun, Mexico, the popular beach destination south of the border.

Cruz “is vacationing in Cancun right now when people are literally freezing to death in the state that he was elected to represent and serve”

More than 130 of the state’s 254 counties were experiencing water outages or potential contamination, and more than 250,000 residents had not had water service for three days, according to state data.

Store shelves were cleared of food, lines formed at public spigots in parks, firewood was hard to come by and out-of-state plumbers were invited to come work on an epidemic of burst pipes. Hospitals reported oxygen shortages and nursing homes and dialysis centers struggled to stay online.

Some do not have enough water to drink, let alone wash. Others are dealing with flooding from burst pipes, unreliable gas and electricity service and “boil water” notices spreading to additional major cities.

And with at least two dozen confirmed deaths in the state since the weekend storm, the National Weather Service announced on Wednesday that a new storm front would likely bring another round of frigid temperatures to Texas and “significant ice accumulations”.

The immediate risks for the most vulnerable residents remained exposure, malnourishment and the threat of fires or carbon monoxide poisoning as residents sat inside cars, brought grills indoors, and used fireplaces for the first time in years in an attempt to stay warm.

 

[Nigel]

So why did this happen, and how do turbines operate in locations where severe cold is much more likely?

Several wind turbine experts have told Newsweek that the situation in Texas could have been avoided if the turbines had been equipped with what are known as cold weather packages, which can involve a number of precautions such as heating up turbine components and lubricants. Samuel Brock, a spokesman for the American Clean Power Association, told Forbes on Tuesday it "hasn't been necessary" to install such kits in Texas where the climate is generally warm.

Benjamin Sovacool, professor of energy policy at the University of Sussex in the U.K., told Newsweek: "In Northern Europe, wind power operates very reliably in even colder temperatures, including the upper Arctic regions of Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

"As long as wind turbines are properly maintained and serviced, they can operate reliably in temperatures well below zero. Humans, to carry out servicing and maintenance and operation, are the most important factor, not the weather."

Clifford Jones, a chemical engineer and visiting professor at the University of Chester, said the initial design of the turbine itself is also a factor. Special "cold-temperature steels" are used in wind turbines that are destined for colder climates, while lubricants are used which are capable of remaining at the right viscosity for those temperatures.

He told Newsweek: "In terms of annual average temperature Texas is the third-hottest U.S. mainland state, being exceeded only by Florida and Louisiana. Wind turbines at such locations not incorporating these features can be upgraded by installed heating. Such upgrades have been consistently successful at wind farms at cold locations."

Another downside is that blades which do not have an ice-prevention system installed may need to be stopped temporarily while cold temperatures pass. Jian Wang, a professor of aircraft technology and his team at London's Kingston University said doing so "introduces safety hazards where big chunks of ice falling off the blade could present a hazard to people in and around wind farms".

However, Wang also told Newsweek: "With the current range of anti-icing measures available, wind power is an effective source of energy in cold climates, because icing can be managed and the quality of wind that is normally available in colder locations.

"Although fossil fuels may have met our needs in the past, they have caused significant problems for the environment and to our health. They are also a finite resource which is reducing with the growing market demand for energy, so relying on them would not be a wise long-term strategy."

Why Did Wind Turbines Freeze in Texas When They Work in the Arctic?

Some Texas officials have criticized wind power after turbines froze during the winter storm. But in Arctic regions, turbines are used regularly with measures in place to keep them running despite the chill.

www.newsweek.com

Texas current sources of electricity:
Gas 67%
Coal 16%
Nuclear 8%
Wind 7%
Doesn't seem to be anything else, no hydro, biomass, waste, solar, geothermal...
Also no offshore wind turbines, at the moment there is a lot of wind in the gulf, not much on land, they put the turbines in the wrong place!

 

[Nigel]

How to store CO² and produce a carbon negative wind turbine:

Vestas invests in Swedish firm that builds wooden towers for wind turbines

Vestas announced Thursday that it had invested in a Swedish firm which develops and manufactures wooden wind turbine towers. The Danish turbine maker said it had become a minority investor in Modvion…

ocean-energyresources.com